San Francisco Trial Lawyers Association - Badge
Super Lawyers / Scott Kalkin / 10 Years - Badge
Consumer Attorneys California - Badge
Avvo Rating 10 / Scott David Kalkin / Top Attorney - Badge
Martindale-Hubbell / AV Preeminent 2020 - Badge
The State Bar of California - Badge
American Association for JUSTICE - Badge

Court Finds for LTD Claimant After Insurer Misclassified Her Job

At our law firm, we represent disabled clients in their applications for long-term disability benefits. It is not unusual for LTD insurers to make mistakes in their decision-making processes, causing a wrongful denial of benefits. Often when an experienced lawyer carefully reviews the administrative record of medical and vocational evidence the insurance company or its administrator relied on to deny or terminate benefits, the attorney discovers errors.

In such a case, an internal appeal within the insurance company or a lawsuit, depending on the stage of the claim, gives the claimant and his or her attorney the opportunity to point out the mistake and advocate for an award of benefits.

Just this scenario occurred in the recent ERISA case of Ray v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company in which a federal judge in Washington State reversed the LTD claim denial because the insurer had used the wrong description of the claimant’s occupation when looking at whether she could do that work with her irritable bowel syndrome.

Ray was a nurse who developed IBS that caused uncontrollable diarrhea that required continual access to a bathroom.

Her LTD policy defined total disability as the inability to perform the material duties of the claimant’s “regular occupation” for the first 24 months of her illness. In denying Ray’s LTD application, Reliance said that her regular occupation was a “private duty nurse” and that she could work full-time in that job.

Ray argued that this job classification ignored the duties of her job as a “visiting nurse” that required her to frequently travel by car to visit patients in their homes. While in the vehicle or at patients’ homes, if she had an onset of diarrhea, she needed access to a bathroom “to attend to her hygiene and take steps to prevent infection.”

The judge agreed with the claimant that the insurer had improperly defined the material duties of her job as a visiting nurse by classifying her as a “private duty nurse” who would have no travel requirements. Her symptoms of “recurrent unpredictable episodes of bowel incontinence” are inconsistent with the duties of a visiting nurse.

The decision is available on Westlaw at 2018 WL 3630301.

Client Reviews

Just when I thought there was no hope to recover my LTD benefits, I found attorney Constantin Roboostoff. With his expertise, I was able to recover all of my back long term disability benefits. Other attorneys wouldn’t take my case because it wasn’t cut and dry. Mr. Roboostoff took the challenge and...

CW

It was my pleasure to make contact with Scott Kalkin three years ago after other lawyers had turned me away and told me I would not succeed in my lawsuit. Thanks to Scott's thoroughness, dedication, and diligence, my lawsuit WAS successful and he saw me through to the end, which included putting...

RB

As soon as I met with Scott, I could tell he was knowledgeable, resourceful, experienced, highly professional, and would be dedicated to getting me fair treatment. Scott has handled all interactions with my insurance company ever since. Being able to rely on him to represent me has been a huge...

SO

Contact Us

  1. 1 Free Consultation
  2. 2 Client-Focused Representation
  3. 3 50+ Years of Combined Experience

Fill out the contact form or call us at Local: 415-732-0282 or Toll Free: 877-374-7270 to schedule your free consultation.

Leave Us a Message